Giving Back: One Firm’s Legacy of Serving the Community · giving back over the years. The example wasn’t lost as Steve has passed that precious gift down to his own children,

A Publication of the San Fernando Valley Bar AssociationDECEMBER 2016 • $4

ww

w.s

fvb

a.o

rg

Practice Areas for New Lawyers

Giving Back: One Firm’s Legacy of Serving the Community

2 Valley Lawyer ■ DECEMBER 2016 www.sfvba.org

◗ 9:30 a.m.Nuts and Bolts of Estate PlanningNuts and Bolts of Estate PlanningAlice A. SalvoLaw Offi ces of Alice A. Salvo1.5 MCLE Hours

◗ 11:00 a.m.Avoiding Bar DisciplineAvoiding Bar DisciplineProfessor Robert Barrett2 MCLE Hours (Legal Ethics)

◗ 1:00 p.m.LunchLunch

◗ 1:45 p.m.Prevention of Substance AbusePrevention of Substance AbuseGreg Dorst, The Other Bar1 MCLE Hour (Competence Issues)

◗ 2:45 p.m.If It’s Not Admissible, Why Bother?If It’s Not Admissible, Why Bother?Jack TrimarcoJack Trimarco Polygraph Services1 Hour MCLE

◗ 9:00 a.m.Partnership AgreementsPartnership AgreementsWesley Hampton, Narver Insurance Gary Barr, Alpert Barr & Grant1 MCLE Hour (Legal Ethics)

◗ 10:00 a.m.Top Ten Insurance Mistakes andTop Ten Insurance Mistakes and How Best to Advise Your ClientHow Best to Advise Your ClientElliot Matloff, The Matloff Company 1 MCLE Hour

◗ 11:00 a.m.Elimination of BiasElimination of BiasCarol Newman and John Stephens 1 MCLE Hour (Recognition and Elimination of Bias)

◗ 12:00 noonLunchLunch

◗ 1:00 p.m. Practice, Manage, Grow: LeveragingPractice, Manage, Grow: Leveraging Technology to Maximize EfficiencyTechnology to Maximize Effi ciency and Increase Your Bottom Lineand Increase Your Bottom LineThomson Reuters1 MCLE Hour

◗ 2:00 p.m. Fraud’s Origin and ConsequencesFraud’s Origin and ConsequencesChris Hamilton, CPA, CFE, CVA Arxis Financial, Inc. 1 MCLE Hour (Legal Ethics)

◗ 3:00 p.m. Common Misconceptions: Marriage,Common Misconceptions: Marriage, Divorce & CohabitationDivorce & CohabitationVeronica WoodLewitt Hackman Shapiro Marshall & Harlan, ALC1 MCLE Hour

◗ 4:00 p.m. Employment Law UpdateEmployment Law UpdateHannah Sweiss and Tal YeyniLewitt Hackman Shapiro Marshall & Harlan, ALC1 MCLE Hour

Supported by

January 13 and 14, 2017Braemar Country Club 4001 Reseda Boulevard Tarzana

FRIDAY, JANUARY 13 SATURDAY, JANUARY 14

SFVBASFVBA2020ththAAnnualnnualMCLEMCLEMarathonMarathon

Flash Drive Only

Member Non-member

MCLE MARATHON REGISTRATION FEES

(Pre-Registration deadline is January 6, 2017.)

Membership Dues: $

Total Enclosed/To be Charged: $

Credit Card #_____ - _____ -_____ -_____

Expiration Date _____ / _____ / _____

Signature

REGISTRATION FORM AND MEMBERSHIP

APPLICATION

2-Day Seminar $199 $499 or

Friday, January 13 $149 $279

Saturday, January 14 $149 $279 or Per MCLE Hour $40 $69

Class Attending

Late Registration Fee $40 $60

MCLE Self-Study $169 $169 Flash Drive (with Marathon Registration)

MCLE Self-Study $219 $299

MCLE FLASH DRIVEOnly $169

for MCLE Marathon Registrants!Contains 13 Popular Valley

Lawyer MCLE ArticlesEarn the Maximum 12.5 Hours of Self-Study

Credits (Including All Specialty Credits)

If paying by credit card:

Name

Firm

Address

City

State, Zip Code

Phone

Fax

E-Mail

State Bar No.

Bar Admission Date

SAN FERNANDOSAN FERNANDO VALLEY BARVALLEY BAR ASSOCIATIONASSOCIATION MEMBERS EARN UP TO

MEMBERS EARN UP TO12.5 HOURS12.5 HOURSOFOF MCLE FORMCLE FOR ONLY $199!ONLY $199!


FEATURES

12 Taking a Dip in the Tip Pool | BY BRIAN E. KOEGLE

14 The Old and the New: Practice Areas for New Lawyers | BY MATTHEW D. GURNICK

24 Giving Back: One Firm’s Legacy of Serving the Community | BY MICHAEL D. WHITE

30 Creativity Conflict: Differing Protection in the United States and Europe | BY JASMINE AARABI

34 Retirement Planning | BY BARRY L. PINSKY

VALL WYERAEY

MCLE TEST NO. 98 ON PAGE 23.

www.sfvba.org DECEMBER 2016 ■ Valley Lawyer 5

7 President’s Message

9 From the Editor

10 Event Calendars

DEPARTMENTS

44 Classifieds

39 Valley Community Legal Foundation

CONTENTS DECEMBER 2016

A Publication of the San Fernando Valley Bar Association

24

40 New Members

30

14

42 Photo Gallery

On the cover (left to right): David Seror, Corey Weber, Nicholas Rozansky, Steven Gubner and Mark BrutzkusPhoto by Ron Murray

12

40

SAN FERNANDO VALLEY BAR ASSOCIATION

5567 Reseda Boulevard, Suite 200Tarzana, CA 91356

Phone (818) 227-0490Fax (818) 227-0499

www.sfvba.org

EDITORMichael D. White

GRAPHIC DESIGNERMarina Senderov

BOARD OF TRUSTEES

President ..................................Kira S. Masteller

President-Elect .........................Alan E. Kassan

Secretary .....................................Yi Sun Kim

Treasurer ..................................Barry P. Goldberg

Past President ..........................Carol L. Newman

Executive Director ....................Elizabeth Post

TRUSTEES

Jonathan Birdt Samuel R.W. Price

Matthew A. Breddan Joanna M. Sanchez

Michelle E. Diaz Allan D. Sarver

Heather Glick-Atalla Marlene Seltzer

Peta-Gay Gordon Hannah Sweiss

Alexander J. Harwin Toni Vargas

David G. Jones Christopher P. Warne

Kathy G. Neumann

Director of Public Services ......... Rosie Soto Cohen

Director of Education & Events .... Linda Temkin

Communications Manager ......... Michael D. White

Referral Consultant .................... Fanny Arellano

................................................... Catherine Carballo-

SECTION CHAIRS

Bankruptcy Law ............................ Steven R. Fox

Business Law & Real Property ..... Steven J. Shapero

....................................................... Neil M. Sunkin

Criminal Law.................................. David S. Kestenbaum

....................................................... Angela Berry

Employment Law .......................... Kimberly Westmoreland

Family Law .................................... Sandra Etue

...................................................... Amir Aharonov

IP, Entertainment & Internet Law... John Stephens

Litigation ......................................Christopher P. Warne

New Lawyers ..............................Hannah Sweiss

Probate & Estate Planning ............ John E. Rogers

....................................................... Nancy A. Reinhardt

Taxation Law ................................Ronald Hughes

.....................................................Hratch J. Karakachian

Workers’ Compensation .............. Jeffrey S. Swartz

Valley Lawyer is published monthly. Articles, announcements, and advertisements are due by the first day of the month prior to the publication date. The articles in Valley Lawyer are written for general interest and are not meant to be relied upon as a substitute for independent research and independent verification of accuracy.


STAFF

Printing Southwest Offset Printing

© 2016 San Fernando Valley Bar Association

Merino

How didthat lastlease workout for you?

Landlords lease office space everyday, so they know the ins and outs of crafting a lease that benefits them the most. At Mazirow Commercial, we represent you, the tenant, and only you. With our decades of lease negotiation experience, we make sure you come to an even negotiating table with the landlord and stay out of a leasing bind.

805-449-1945www.tenantadvisory.com

Tenant Representation & Advisory Real Estate ServicesFor large corporations to individual entrepreneurs

The SFVBA’s Upcoming Journey to Cuba

PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE


KIRA S. MASTELLER SFVBA President

HIS COMING YEAR THE SAN Fernando Valley Bar Association will offer a Cross-Cultural Educational Exchange Trip to Cuba, a unique opportunity for SFVBA members, our families, and friends. After attending the American Bar Association’s Bar Leadership Institute last March and meeting Michael Sykes, who organizes educational trips to points across the globe for many bar associations, we decided it would be a great time to bring such an opportunity to the SFVBA. What better way to get to know other bar members, while spending quality time with family, taking in the rich culture and history of Cuba, the island country only a handful of miles from the United States and, until recently, virtually inaccessible to U.S. visitors. Our SFVBA Cuba trip will include five star accommodations in central Havana and an exciting itinerary, including visits to the home of

Cuba’s former president Jose Miguel Gomez and the lavish Palacio de los Matrimonios, the massive renovation project of the Capitolio, and the Parque de la Fraternidad—an old taxi central which has many makes and models of ‘50s-era American-made cars. We will explore the Plaza de San Francisco—a cobbled plaza surrounded by buildings dating from the 18th century, that is dominated by the baroque Iglesia and Conventor de San Francisco dating from 1719—and learn about the ongoing Escuela de Taller Restoration Project in Havana Vieja, where the preservation of architectural history and cultural heritage is the priority. We will also visit schools, artist studios, and art museums; enjoy orchestras; and attend lectures, including one presented by a former judge and professor of law at the University of Havana, and another by a noted Cuban historian. In addition, we will take a bus tour of the modern

architecture of western Havana and walk through at one of the country’s most famous cigar factories. Participants will meet with attorneys, accountants and other members of Cuba’s emerging class of self-employed professionals, who are developing business plans and marketing their services while navigating the island nation’s evolving system of contract and licensing regulations. Fine dining, tropical cocktails, and great company—along with special performances of Cuban music and dance—will make for unforgettable evenings, with many more fantastic day trips and educational opportunities available. The SFVBA’s Cross-Cultural Educational Exchange Trip to Cuba is scheduled for the week of October 23, 2017. Please save the date in your calendar and watch your email and the Valley Lawyer for more details and instructions on how to register for the trip.


Phone: (800) 468-4467 E-mail: [email protected]

www.

An Insurance and Financial Services Company

Life InsuranceTerm, Universal Life, Survivorship, Estate Planning, Key-Person

Insure your most important asset—"Your ability to earn income"

Several quality carriers for individuals and firms

Disability Insurance

Insures you in your own occupation

All major insurance companies for individuals & firmsHealth Insurance

Benefits keep up with inflation

Long Term Care Insurance

Elliot Matloff


HERE’S A LOT OF TALK TODAY about legacies and what kind of values and aspirations we, as a society, will hand down to those who follow after us. Unfortunately, much of the legacy building over the past few years has balanced on individual motivation (e.g., ”what will future generations think of me”) and political ambition (e.g., ”will future generations carry on my agenda”), with the concept of doing good simply for the sake of doing good, often buried under piles of ego-driven self-promotion. Thank heaven there are glowing exceptions. When I recently interviewed member Steven Gubner—the highest bidder for this cover in the VCLF’s online auction—and his fi rm, Brutzkus Gubner Rozansky Seror Weber LLP, for an article on their community service activities, a couple of things later jumped out at me from my notes. First was the continuum of legacy building, from father to son and, once again, father to son, that’s played such a defi ning role, in his own life, and in that of his family and, in turn, his fi rm. The value of community service was handed-off to Gubner from his father, “a blue-collar guy who worked six days a week,” who performed countless acts of giving back over the years. The example

wasn’t lost as Steve has passed that precious gift down to his own children, and to his fi rm, of which the individual members have set a standard of good works that others should aspire to without thought of recompense or reward. The challenge, he says, is motivating younger attorneys. Burdened with serious student loan debt and the challenges of forging the right path in their chosen profession, they often have scant time for anything other than conforming to the often all-consuming, winning-and-losing mindset at the very core of the legal profession. “We work hard to instill a sense of community service in our new attorneys and get them to see that real value doesn’t always necessarily come from making money,” says Gubner. “Every hour you invest doesn’t have to be billable.” It was a lesson he learned from seeing his father give back with no expectation of a return-on-investment, he says, noting that “nobody’s called me and said ‘Steve, I have $1 million case for you.’ I’ve been on the board of United Cerebral Palsy for 20 years and I haven’t seen any work come out of it and that’s perfectly okay. We’re not doing it to generate business…were doing it because we want to give back.”

FROM THE EDITOR

Building a LegacyMICHAEL D. WHITESFVBA Editor

[email protected]

Correction to November IssueIn our November issue the editing process resulted in Angela Berry’s “Proposition 47 Update” article containing some errors and misleading information. Regrettably, Valley Lawyer’s high standards were not upheld. Editorial errors were on page 30 in the fi rst two paragraphs and the last paragraph under the subheading, “Procedure for Relief for Past Convictions.” The printed version had an incorrect statement about how unreasonable risk can be shown. The law is, as Berry states, that an unreasonable risk can be shown by an unreasonable risk that the petitioner will commit a super strike. Other serious or violent felonies such as robbery, kidnaping or arson are immaterial. The online version has been corrected. Valley Lawyer apologizes for these errors.

CALENDAR


DECEMBER 2016

SUN MON TUE WED THU FRI SAT

Probate & Estate Planning SectionNew Medi-Cal Recovery Laws12:00 NOONMONTEREY AT ENCINO RESTAURANT

Certifi ed Elder Law Attorney Ruth Phelps will outline the latest. (1 Hour MCLE)

Bankruptcy Law SectionThe 10 Supreme Court Cases You Must Know12:00 NOONSFVBA OFFICES

Noted bankruptcy attorneys Jonathan Hayes and David Gould and the Hon. Alan Ahart will discuss the ten critical Supreme Court Cases that can ruin your client’s day and yours! (1.25 MCLE Hours)

Blanket the Homeless and ARS Legal Clinic8:00 AML.A. FAMILY HOUSINGNORTH HOLLYWOOD

The San Fernando Valley Bar Association is a State Bar of California MCLE approved provider. Visit www.sfvba.org for seminar pricing and to register online, or contact Linda Temkin at (818) 227-0490, ext. 105 or [email protected]. Pricing discounted for active SFVBA members and early registration.

Intellectual Property, Entertainment & Internet Law SectionCyber, Intellectual Property and Technology12:00 NOONSFVBA OFFICES

John Stephens updates the group on the latest cybersecurity and intellectual property issues. (1 MCLE Hour)

Membership & Marketing Committee 6:00 PMSFVBA OFFICES

See page 29

Editorial Committee 12:00 NOONTONY ROMA’S

Valley Lawyer Member BulletinDeadline to submit announcements to [email protected] for January issue.

See page 40


JANUARY 2017 CALENDARSUN MON TUE WED THU FRI SAT

Valley Lawyer Member BulletinDeadline to submit announcements to [email protected] for February issue.

Membership & Marketing Committee 6:00 PMSFVBA OFFICES

Family Law Section New Laws 5:30 PM MONTEREY AT ENCINO RESTAURANT

Barry Harlan kicks off the new year by bringing the Section up to speed on the latest laws and changes pertaining to the Family Law Court. Approved for Legal Specialization. (1.5 MCLE Hours)

Editorial Committee 12:00 NOONTONY ROMA’S

Board of Trustees6:00 PMSFVBA OFFICES

Probate & Estate Planning SectionLegislative and Case Law Update12:00 NOONMONTEREY AT ENCINO RESTAURANT

David Coleman will discuss new laws and updates. (1 MCLE Hour)

Taxation Law Section An Update from the Board of Equalization12:00 NOONSFVBA OFFICES

James Horner will outline recent changes occurring at the Board of Equalization. (1 MCLE Hour)

See page 3

SFVBA 20th Annual

MCLE Marathon

Braemar Braemar Country ClubCountry ClubEarn all your participatory credits, including specialized credits.

5:30 PM CHABLIS RESTAURANT TARZANA

VBN is dedicated to offering organized, high quality networking for SFVBA members.


N THE RESTAURANT AND service industry, the custom of “tip pooling” is a way of life. Under that policy, tipped employees–such as servers and direct service employees–are required to share or distribute a portion of their tips to “back of the house” support staff (e.g., dishwashers, busboys, kitchen staff, etc.) The policy came into question recently when the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals looked into whether such tip pools violated the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). As it turns out, the answer to this question is yes.

Federal law allows an employer to count an employee’s tips toward the hourly minimum wage obligation. This is called a tip credit. Specifi cally, the Code of Federal Regulations1 provides that tips are the property of the employee whether or not the employer has taken a tip credit under section 3(m) of the FLSA. The employer is prohibited from using an employee’s tips, whether or not it has taken a tip credit, for any reason other than that which is statutorily permitted in Section 3(m), “as a credit against its minimum wage obligations to the employee, or in furtherance of a valid tip pool.”

According to the section, only tips actually received by an employee as money belonging to the employee may be counted in determining whether the person is a tipped employee within the meaning of the Act and in applying the provisions of section 3(m) which govern wage credits for tips. Employers who use this tip credit are required to provide written notice to their employees that the tips they receive will be used to satisfy the federal minimum wage requirements. The notice must also state that the employer allows employees to retain their own tips, unless the employer utilizes a valid

Brian E. Koegle is partner at Poole & Shaffery, LLP with offi ces in Santa Clarita and downtown Los Angeles. Mr. Koegle specializes in labor and employment law and handles both litigation and counseling matters. He can be reached at [email protected].

By Brian E. Koegle

Taking a Dip in the Tip PoolWhere Federal and State Laws Collide


tip pool. If an employer does not use an employee’s tip income to satisfy the minimum wage, no notice is required. The FLSA also requires a tip pool to be comprised exclusively of employees who are “customarily and regularly” tipped–direct service employees– in order to be considered valid. Six years ago, the Ninth Circuit determined that tip pooling (sharing with back-of-the-house employees) was lawful, at least as to those employers who did not take a tip credit against the minimum wage, because existing federal law was silent on the issue.2 But less than a year after that decision, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) issued its own decision that extended the tip pool restrictions of the FLSA to all employers, regardless of whether they claim a tip credit against the minimum wage. Fast forward to late February 2016, when the Ninth Circuit ruled in a split decision that the DOL opinion was appropriate and was a proper exercise of its power. Specifi cally, the court held that the agency has the right to issue a regulation defi ning what a tip pool is, and to which employers–whether or not they claim the tip credit against minimum wage–the law would apply.3

Based on this ruling, the DOL regulation will most likely invalidate existing, well-settled California law which permits tip-pooling for back-of-the-house employees. Under the federal rule, only employees who “customarily and regularly” receive tips can be in tip pools. This means that only those individuals who are directly involved in service–servers, bartenders, busboys, hosts–can participate, but everyone else is excluded. Since federal law trumps state law in this circumstance, the more stringent federal policy would apply to California employers. It remains possible that the entire Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal may re-consider this ruling, or that the U.S. Supreme Court elects to review the decision at a later date. To date, however, the DOL regulation is the effective rule of law, which all employers must comply with. Failure to implement changes to existing, non-compliant policies could result in signifi cant wage and hour violations, including class action claims.

LONG TERM DISABILITY, LONG TERM CARE, HEALTH,EATING DISORDER, AND LIFE

INSURANCE CLAIMS

• California Federal and State Courts

• More than 20 years experience

• Settlements, trials and appeals

Referral fees as allowed by State Bar of California

ERISALAWYERS

818.886.2525

www.kantorlaw.netDedicated to helping people

receive the insurance benefits to which they

are entitled

WE HANDLE BOTH

ERISA & BAD FAITHMATTERS

Handling matters throughout California

1 29 CFR §531.52.2 Cumbie v. Woody Woo, Inc., 596 F.3d 577 (9th Cir. 2010).3 Oregon Restaurant and Lodging Association LLC v. Perez, 2016 WL 706678 (9th Cir. Feb.23, 2016).


By reading this article and answering the accompanying test questions, you can earn one MCLE credit. To apply for the credit, please follow the instructions on the test answer form on page 23.

The author explores legal developments and trends in The author explores legal developments and trends in a number of growing practice areas—such as an aging a number of growing practice areas—such as an aging population and the latest technologies—and examines population and the latest technologies—and examines how new lawyers can implement fresh approaches and how new lawyers can implement fresh approaches and concepts to mold the future of the legal profession.concepts to mold the future of the legal profession.

By Matthew D. Gurnick


THE OLD AND THE NEW: Practice Areas for New Lawyers

INDING ONE’S WAY IN LIFE AND IN LAW CAN BE

daunting. Serendipity surely plays a role in every

lawyer’s transition from wide-eyed to well-seasoned.

Fortunately, good luck exists where opportunity meets

preparation. This article provides an overview of growing

practice areas and emerging legal developments that

present opportunities for new lawyers: an aging population

and new technology.

An Aging America

More than 200 years ago, in words still relevant now, the

sage Benjamin Franklin famously wrote that, “In this world

nothing is certain but death and taxes.”1

According to the U.S. Department of Health and

Human Services, by 2060, 98 million Americans will be

over the age of 65, more than twice the number in 2014.2

California alone will be home to almost 9 million people

over age 65 by 2030, with one in every three residents of

the state over the age of 50.3

An aging population poses challenges for communities

and wide ranging legal issues. As the population ages, the

number of people with serious functional and cognitive

disabilities will increase, as will the usual infirmities of

seniority, placing strains on healthcare and entitlement

programs.

Employer-sponsored retirement, pension plans,

healthcare, and insurance, along with government

programs like Social Security and Medicare, have helped

support many individuals as they age, but costs of

these programs are expected to skyrocket as the elderly

population grows.4 How government and employer

programs address the impacts of increasingly aged

populations will be a significant issue for years to come,

and will create critical legal questions.

New lawyers can expect increasing demand in a

variety of practice areas that serve elderly populations like

estate planning, guardianship, long term care, and issues

relating to proper treatment of elders, to name a few.

By learning these areas of practice, new lawyers can set

themselves up for many years of opportunities for steady

work and fulfilling service to the public.

Two legal developments will have a particularly

large impact on aging populations–the Social Security

Administration’s new guidelines for mental health

evaluations and the rise of elder abuse and related claims.


SSA’s New Rules for Mental Health Evaluations

This past September, the Social Security Administration

(SSA) revised its criteria for evaluating claims involving

mental disorders under Titles II and XVI of the Social

Security Act to reflect advances in the medical

profession.5 The new rules, which take effect January 17,

2017, are the result of an extensive amendment process

dating back to at least 2010 when SSA began a public

comment process.6

The new rules are now consistent with current

standard classifications in the mental health profession.

To ensure that individuals receive necessary assistance

as soon as possible, SSA “updated the diagnostic and

functional criteria” and is “using IQ test score criteria

to identify quickly people who may qualify for disability

benefits based on an intellectual disability,” among

several other changes.7 The revisions also provide new

instructions for determining if an individual is disabled

under Social Security programs.

There are four main changes to SSA’s evaluation

process.8 First, adult mental health listings were updated

to coincide with the American Psychological Association’s

categories for mental disorders, including additions

for neurodevelopmental, eating, and trauma/stress or

related disorders (e.g., post-traumatic stress syndrome or

“PTSD”). Substance addiction disorders were removed,

reflecting SSA’s position that a substance abuse disorder

alone is not enough for an individual to be approved.

Second, SSA modified the “B” criteria in its mental

health listings, commonly known as the “four areas of

functioning,” which include the abilities to understand,

remember, or apply information; interact with others;

concentrate, persist, or maintain pace; and adapt or

manage oneself.

SSA no longer views activities for daily living (ADLs)

and episodes of decompensation (i.e., deterioration of

an individual’s mental health) as separate categories.

However, ADLs are a primary source of information for all

four areas of function and episodes of decompensation

can still influence SSA’s evaluation, especially with

respect to how exacerbations or remissions affect an

applicant’s ability to function on a regular and continuing

basis.

In addition, SSA considers the greatest degree of

limitation for any single area of functioning to be the

Matthew D. Gurnick is a new lawyer pursuing a career in employment law. He currently is an Employment Law Clerk with NBCUniversal’s in-house counsel, and has volunteered with both the Housing Rights and Elder Abuse Title Fraud Units at Bet Tzedek Legal Services. He can be reached at [email protected].



degree of limitation for the whole area of functioning

(e.g., if an applicant has “marked” limitations in ability to

understand, but “mild” limitations in ability to remember

or apply information, the applicant will receive a marked

rating for area 1 of functioning).

Third, SSA updated criteria for evaluating intellectual

disorders to more closely track the definition of intellectual

disability. The new criteria focuses on three elements:

significant limitations in general intellectual functioning;

significant deficits in adaptive functioning; and evidence

that the disorder began before age 22. Applicants who

can take a standardized intelligence test must have either

an IQ score of 70 or below, or a score between 71 and 75,

accompanied by a verbal or performance IQ score of 70 or

below.

Fourth, SSA explicitly recognized the importance of

social workers, case managers, and outreach workers

in providing evidence of impairments, especially for

homeless people. Community service providers can be a

crucial source of evidence in evaluating how mental illness

impacts an applicant’s ability to function. SSA will consider

such evidence even if an applicant has not had an ongoing

relationship or is not currently receiving treatment from the

particular community service provider.

These changes will take effect January 17, 2017 and

reflect many years of planning and dialogue between SSA

and stakeholders. SSA hopes to streamline the application

process for Social Security and disability benefits.

Meanwhile, new lawyers can familiarize themselves with

the changes and prepare to help the increasing number of

individuals who will seek legal assistance in coming years.

Elder Abuse

Studies show that elder abuse is a serious problem that an

aging population will, sadly, exacerbate. As many as one

in every seven Americans over age 60 has experienced

some elder abuse and cases of elder abuse are widely

believed to be underreported.9 The National Center

of Elder Abuse estimates that only one in 14 cases is

reported, and that number may be as low as one in every

23 cases.10

Fear of retaliation, loss of independence, shame,

and a general lack of understanding are only a few of the

reasons why elderly victims fail to report abuse.11 Elder

abuse victims often experience depression, anxiety, and

other mental health issues, and studies show even low

levels of or infrequent mistreatment can increase risk of

death by up to 300%.12

The California Legislature has created special

protections for the elderly. The legislature recognized

that seniors may be confused, on various medications,

mentally or physically impaired, or incompetent, and


therefore less able to protect themselves, understand or

report criminal conduct, or testify in court on their own

behalf.13 The legislature established broad definitions14

and set steep penalties.15

Elder abuse is defined as “physical abuse, neglect,

financial abuse, abandonment, isolation, abduction, or

other treatment that causes physical harm, pain, or mental

suffering.”16 A care custodian may be found to have

caused elder abuse by failing to provide goods or services

that are necessary to avoid physical harm or mental

suffering.17 The penalties for elder abuse can include

imprisonment up to four years18 and, if the victim was over

age 70 and dies due to the abuse, an additional seven

years.19

California’s approach to elder abuse is both broad

and sweeping. Numerous factual circumstances can give

rise to elder abuse claims, including health services, social

services, financial services, housing, and family relations.

Nearly every aspect of a senior’s daily life can result in a

potential claim. This means there is increasing demand for

representation by both plaintiffs and defendants. Cases

are often highly fact-intensive and emotionally charged

and helping an elder-abuse victim or defending against

an unjustified claim is possibly among the most fulfilling

experiences in the legal profession.

New Technology

The disruptive power of new technology is undeniable.

Technological advances dominate virtually all aspects

of daily life and impact every segment of business and

industry. From social media20 to artificial intelligence,

blockchain databases and 3-D printers, technology has

changed how people interact with each other and with the

surrounding world. For years to come, new and evolving

technologies will continue to drive societal changes.

New lawyers find themselves in a unique position,

better suited than any other generation to update the

law to address never-seen-before issues created by new

technologies. While there are myriad examples, self-

driving, or so-called “autonomous,” vehicles are a prime

illustration of technology’s disruptive power and the

inadequacy of current law to address the consequences

of their use.

Autonomous Vehicles

In October, Tesla announced that all new vehicles will

have the hardware necessary for “full self-driving capability

at a safety level greater than that of a human driver.”21

Tesla is not alone as 33 corporations are currently

developing autonomous vehicles, including traditional

carmakers like Audi and Volvo and technology companies

like Google and Uber.22

Herb Fox, Esq.Certifi ed Appellate Law Specialist*

A Full Service Appellate Boutique

Southern California Appellate Superlawyer©

AV© Rated / AVVO© Rating 10

*Board of Legal Specialization, Cal. State Bar

310.284.3184 [email protected]

Appeals and Writs

Petitions for Review and Certiorari

Post-Trial and Anti-SLAPP Motions

Appellate Opinion Letters

Pre-Trial, Trial, and Post-Trial Consultations

Former Research Attorney, State Court of Appeal

29 Years Experience

250+ Appeals and Writs of Record

Hourly, Flat and Contingency Fees ConsideredReferral Fees Paid in Accordance with State Bar Requirements


Tesla is unique because it is not just testing

autonomous vehicles. Rather, Tesla already has cars

on the road, in the hands of consumers, capable of

driving in autopilot mode without human input. Moreover,

the first U.S. fatality involving an autonomous vehicle

occurred in June in Florida when a Tesla Model S

operating in autopilot mode collided with a tractor-

trailer.23 This accident brought several issues to the

forefront of the autonomous vehicle debate. Due to

an absence of legislation, many questions still remain,

such as determining liability and standards of care, and

establishing a coherent national policy.

In a 2013 article, “The Reasonable Self-Driving Car,”

Professor Bryant Walker Smith asks, “what is reasonably

safe…[and] How safe is safe enough?”24 Smith explains

that this question has several possible answers, each

perhaps a bit unsatisfying. First, by requiring self-driving

cars to perform better than human

drivers on average, there will be

some accidents that a human

driver could have avoided. Second,

requiring self-driving cars to perform

at least as well as a perfect human

driver for each specific maneuver

would prevent use of technologies

that, while not perfect, could still

improve overall road safety. Or

third, requiring self-driving cars to

perform as well as corresponding

human-vehicle systems would

require human oversight that may

be impractical or undependable.25

To determine liability in the context of tort law,

should we adopt a negligence standard, strict liability, or

some other standard? Negligence emphasizes process

(e.g., how did the carmaker develop the vehicle), while

strict liability focuses on the product itself (e.g., how

did the vehicle perform).26 Neither approach is perfect.

For example, a reasonably safe process could produce

an unsafe product. Nonetheless, as “sporadic failures

of automated vehicles inevitably occur, negligence

claims, punitive damages awards, and determinations

of foreseeability may all depend in part on the

reasonableness of a defendant manufacturer’s prior

process-based safety arguments.”27

Meanwhile, an administrative law approach could

target outputs by imposing specific requirements on the

vehicle itself.28 For example, safety could be determined

by requiring a vehicle to decelerate from 60 mph to a

standstill in a prescribed distance, or sense movement

under specific conditions. Ultimately, the approach state

legislatures take could determine both the cost and rate

at which both innovation and wide-scale adoption take

place. Regardless, the absence of any clear legislative

plan could be the most detrimental of all.

A number of states are responding to autonomous

vehicle development by enacting legislation. In 2011,

Nevada became the first to authorize autonomous

vehicles. California, Florida, Louisiana, Michigan, North

Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, and the District of Columbia

have since passed legislation, as well.29

The federal government, too, has moved to fill the

legal vacuum. In September, the U.S. Department of

Transportation published its Federal Automated Vehicle

Policy to help “facilitate the responsible introduction of

automated vehicles to make transportation safer, cleaner,

more accessible, and more efficient.”30 The policy has

four sections: vehicle performance, model state policy,

current regulatory tools, and new tools and authorities.31

The vehicle performance

guidance provides manufacturers,

developers, and other

organizations with a safety

assessment framework for safe

design, development, testing,

and deployment and requires

automakers to complete a

safety assessment before cars

are certified for use on public

roads.32 The model state policy

distinguishes between federal

and state responsibilities and

provides policy recommendations

for states to ensure a cohesive

national framework.33

Current regulatory tools give the National Highway

Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) the means to aid

in safe development of automated vehicles, including

interpreting existing rules to provide sufficient flexibility

and testing.34 Lastly, new tools and authorities are

included that the NHTSA can consider in the future.35

Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx has said,

“As the digital era increasingly reaches deeper into

transportation, our task at the U.S. Department of

Transportation is not only to keep pace, but to ensure

public safety while establishing a strong foundation such

that the rules of the road can be known, understood and

responded to by industry and the public.”36 Doing so will

require partnership across industry and professions, and

serves as a fascinating opportunity for new lawyers to

practice in an area that will impact daily life far into the

future. Similarly, outcomes of legislative processes will

steer the direction of legal services, particularly in tort and

insurance law.

Outcomes of legislative processes will steer the

direction of legal services, particularly in tort and

insurance law.”


E-Discovery

New technology is also changing the practice of law itself.

Today, most information is stored digitally–a development

that has complicated the process of pre-trial discovery.

Electronically stored information (ESI) refers to any data

stored in an electronic medium from which information

may be taken directly or, if necessary, after translation

into a reasonably usable form.37 E-discovery refers to the

procedure by which litigants preserve, collect, review,

and exchange ESI.38 Both federal and state rules of civil

procedure provide a framework for e-discovery, as part of

the overall discovery process.

New lawyers, especially those interested in litigation,

should become familiar with these frameworks, as most

lawsuits will include at least some and potentially extensive

e-discovery. In addition, e-discovery has grown into an

industry in-and-of itself, with tech-savvy professionals

trained to handle the process for law firms and business.

The duty to preserve information begins when litigation

is reasonably foreseeable.39 The “mere existence of

a potential claim or the distant possibility of litigation”

does not trigger a duty to preserve, but rather whether a

reasonable party in the same factual circumstances would

have reasonably foreseen that litigation was imminent.40 At

that time, the party must suspend any routine document

retention (or destruction) policies, with the failure to do

so resulting in spoliation sanctions. Any ESI that has

discoverable evidence that is relevant to the claims, or

defenses related to the anticipated litigation, falls within

this duty to preserve.41

A key development in e-discovery is technology

assisted review (TAR), a process for prioritizing and coding

a collection of documents using a computer system that

harnesses human judgments on a sample set and applies

it to the remaining document collection.42 In other words,

TAR uses algorithmic codes to evaluate large document

sets to determine relevance for discovery. While TAR is

relatively new, it has quickly become widely accepted as

a way to increase efficiency while minimizing the costs of

e-discovery.43

Mankind has produced more data in the last two

years than in the entire prior history of the human race.

Estimates suggest that by 2020 each human being on the

planet will produce an average 1.7 megabytes of data per

second.44

As technology becomes more sophisticated and more

information than ever before is created, it is imperative

that discovery practices keep pace. New data formats and

storage methods will require new e-discovery tools, while

newly-minted lawyers will play a critical role in helping the

legal profession keep pace with continually developing

technologies.


1 Tilton v. Missouri Pacific Railroad, 376 U.S. 169, 180 (1964). 2 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Community Living, Aging Statistics (May. 25, 2016), available at http://www.aoa.acl.gov/aging_statistics/index.aspx. 3 Tafoya and Johnson, Graying in the Golden State: Demographic and Economic Trends of Older Americans (Nov. 2000), available at http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/cacounts/CC_1100HJCC.pdf. 4 Mather et al., Population Reference Bureau, Population Bulletin (Dec. 2015), available at http://www.prb.org/pdf16/aging-us-population-bulletin.pdf. 5 Hinkle, Mark, Social Security Administration, Press Release (Sep. 23, 2016), available at https://www.ssa.gov/news/#/post/9-2016-1. 6 Social Security Administration Revised Medical Criteria for Evaluating Mental Disorders, 20 C.F.R. 404-416 (Sep. 26, 2016). 7 Walker, Doug, Social Security Administration, Mental Disorders Rule Update (Sep. 23, 2016), available at http://blog.ssa.gov/mental-disorders-rule-update/. 8 Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, SSI/SSDI Outreach, Access and Recovery Center, (Oct. 3, 2016), available at SSA Revises Criteria for Evaluating Mental Health Conditions, https://soarworks.prainc.com/article/ssa-revises-mental-health-listings.

I am pleased to announce my new association with

Dilbeck Real EstatePlease feel free to call me if I can be

of assistance to you in any aspect of real estate.

Steven M. WestBroker Associate

CalBRE# 02000607Direct: 818.755.5559Cell: 818.808.3179

[email protected]

12164 Ventura Boulevard, Studio City, CA 91604

9 State Bar of California, Elder Abuse Pamphlet (2010) available at http://www.calbar.ca.gov/Public/Pamphlets/ElderAbuse.aspx#1. 10 National Council on Aging, Elder Abuse Facts, available at https://www.ncoa.org/public-policy-action/elder-justice/elder-abuse-facts/; Walton law, A.P.C., Why Does Elder Abuse Go Unreported? (Jun. 6, 2013) available at http://www.californiaelderabuselawyer-blog.com/2013/06/why-does-elder-abuse-go-unrepo.html 11 National Council on Aging, Elder Abuse Facts, available at https://www.ncoa.org/public-policy-action/elder-justice/elder-abuse-facts/ 12 National Council on Aging, Elder Abuse Facts, available at https://www.ncoa.org/public-policy-action/elder-justice/elder-abuse-facts/ 13 Cal. Penal Code §368. 14 Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code §15610.07. 15 Cal. Penal Code §368. 16 Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code §15610.07(a)(1). 17 Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code, §15610.07(a)(2). 18 Cal. Penal Code §368(b)(1). 19 Cal. Penal Code §368 (b)(3)(B). 20 The writing of this very article began with brainstorm discussions crowd-sourced on social media. Many thanks to the individuals who provided ideas, suggestions, and advice! 21 The Tesla Team, All Tesla Cars Being Produced Now Have Full Self-Driving Hardware (Oct. 19, 2016), available at https://www.tesla.com/blog/all-tesla-cars-being-produced-now-have-full-self-driving-hardware. 22 CB Insights, 33 Corporations Working on Autonomous Vehicles (Aug. 11, 2016), available at https://www.cbinsights.com/blog/autonomous-driverless-vehicles-corporations-list/. 23 Vlasic and Boudette, NY Times, Self-Driving Tesla Was Involved in Fatal Crash, U.S. Says (Jun. 30, 2016), available at http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/01/business/self-driving-tesla-fatal-crash-investigation.html?_r=0. 24 Smith, Bryant Walker, The Center for Internet and Society, The Reasonable Self-Driving Car (Oct. 3, 2013), available at http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2013/10/reasonable-self-driving-car. 25 Id. 26 Id. 27 Id. 28 Id. 29 National Conference of State Legislatures, Autonomous | Self-Driving Vehicles Legislation (Oct. 25, 2016), available at http://www.ncsl.org/research/transportation/autonomous-vehicles-legislation.aspx. 30 The White House, Office of the Press Secretary, FACT SHEET: Encouraging the Safe and Responsible Deployment of Automated Vehicles (Sep. 15, 2016), available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2016/09/19/fact-sheet-encouraging-safe-and-responsible-deployment-automated. 31 Department of Transportation, Federal Automated Vehicles Policy (Sep. 2016), available at https://www.transportation.gov/AV/federal-automated-vehicles-policy-september-2016. 32 The White House, Office of the Press Secretary, FACT SHEET: Encouraging the Safe and Responsible Deployment of Automated Vehicles (Sep. 15, 2016), available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2016/09/19/fact-sheet-encouraging-safe-and-responsible-deployment-automated. 33 Id.34 Id. 35 Id. 36 Hill, Chris, USDOT releases Federal Automated Vehicles Policy guidelines for autonomous vehicles (Sep. 20, 2016), available at http://www.equipmentworld.com/usdot-releases-federal-automated-vehicles-policy-guidelines-for-autonomous-vehicles. 37 FRCP 34(a)(1)(A). 38 Exterro, The Basics of E-Discovery, available at http://www.exterro.com/basics-of-e-discovery. 39 Zubulake v. UBS Warburg LLC, 220 F.R.D. 212, 218 (S.D.N.Y. 2003). 40 Micron Tech. Inc. v. Rambus Inc., 645 F.3d 1311, 1320 (Fed. Cir. 2011). 41 Zubulake v. UBS Warburg LLC, 220 F.R.D. 212, 217 (S.D.N.Y. 2003). 42 Maura R. Grossman and Gordon V. Cormack, The Grossman-Cormack Glossary of Technology-Assisted Review, 7 Fed. C. L. Rev. 1 (2013); see also, Paul Burns and Mindy Morton, Technology-Assisted Review: The Judicial Pioneers, The Sedona Conference Institute (2014), available at http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/litigation/materials/2014_sac/2014_sac/technology_assisted_review_the_judicial_pioneers.authcheckdam.pdf. 43 Gricks and Ambrogi, A Brief History of Technology Assisted Review (Nov. 17, 2015), available at http://www.lawtechnologytoday.org/2015/11/history-technology-assisted-review. 44 Marr, Bernard, Big Data: 20 Mind-Boggling Facts Everyone Must Read (Sep. 30, 2015), available at http://www.forbes.com/sites/bernardmarr/2015/09/30/big-data-20-mind-boggling-facts-everyone-must-read/#726e4c236c1d.

Challenges and Opportunities

Aging populations and new technologies provide lawyers

new to the profession with numerous opportunities to

fi nd their niche. While there is no single defi nitive guide to

career development, by being curious and diligent, new

opportunities will present themselves.

With extensive preparation, and a little accompanying

good luck, new lawyers can take advantage of these

evolutions to establish a place in the legal community, and do

what countless generations have done before–serve clients,

contribute to the development of law and society, and leave a

lasting, valuable, and productive model for the future.


Test No. 98This self-study activity has been approved for Minimum Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) credit by the San Fernando Valley Bar Association (SFVBA) in the amount of 1 hour. SFVBA certifies that this activity conforms to the standards for approved education activities prescribed by the rules and regulations of the State Bar of California governing minimum continuing legal education.

MCLE Answer Sheet No. 98INSTRUCTIONS:1. Accurately complete this form.2. Study the MCLE article in this issue.3. Answer the test questions by marking the

appropriate boxes below.4. Mail this form and the $20 testing fee for

SFVBA members (or $30 for non-SFVBA

members) to:

San Fernando Valley Bar Association5567 Reseda Boulevard, Suite 200

Tarzana, CA 91356

METHOD OF PAYMENT:

Check or money order payable to “SFVBA”

Please charge my credit card for

$_________________.

________________________________________

Credit Card Number Exp. Date

________________________________________

Authorized Signature

5. Make a copy of this completed form for your records.

6. Correct answers and a CLE certificate will be mailed to you within 2 weeks. If you have any questions, please contact our

office at (818) 227-0490, ext. 105.

Name______________________________________

Law Firm/Organization________________________

___________________________________________

Address____________________________________

City________________________________________

State/Zip____________________________________

Email_______________________________________

Phone______________________________________

State Bar No._________________________________

ANSWERS:

Mark your answers by checking the appropriate

box. Each question only has one answer.

1. ❑ True ❑ False

2. ❑ True ❑False



















1. The number of Americans age 65 and older will triple by the year 2060, to be over 150 million. ❑ True ❑ False

2. The Social Security Administration’s new rules regarding mental health evaluations will go into effect on January 17, 2017. ❑ True ❑ False

3. An individual with a substance addiction disorder can qualify for social security benefits by demonstrating that the addition is life threatening. ❑ True ❑ False

4. Under the new SSA rules, the SSA will find that an individual that only has mild limitations in ability to concentrate and persist, but is severely limited in ability to maintain pace, has only mild limitations for the third area of function because there are only mild limitations for two of the three activities. ❑ True ❑ False

5. If an applicant takes an IQ test to qualify for benefits under the new SSA rules and receives a full-scale score of 65, he or she will be approved. ❑ True ❑ False

6. Although social workers, case managers, and outreach workers are incredible important in providing evidence of function impairments, they are not explicitly recognized by the new SSA rules. ❑ True ❑ False

7. Only one in every 14 cases of elder abuse are reported due to fear of retaliation, loss of independence, shame, and general lack of understanding. ❑ True ❑ False

8. Victims of elder abuse are more at risk of death as a result of depression, anxiety, and other mental health issues. ❑ True ❑ False

9. The California Legislature has not yet created any special protections for elderly people. ❑ True ❑ False

10. A caretaker who takes money from a patient, but does not cause any physical harm, pain, or mental suffering, has not committed elder abuse as defined by California Welfare and Institutions Code §15610.07. ❑ True ❑ False

11. Only a select group of companies have the technological capacity and know-how to develop autonomous vehicles. ❑ True ❑ False

12. The first fatality caused by an autonomous vehicle occurred in June 2016 when a Tesla collided with a tractor-trailer. ❑ True ❑ False

13. Strict liability focuses on the process involved in making the product (e.g., how did the company plan and design the product). ❑ True ❑ False

14. An administrative law approach to ensuring autonomous vehicles are reasonably safe would involve establishing specific requirements on the vehicle’s performance, like deceleration from 60 to 0 mpg within a proscribed distance. ❑ True ❑ False

15. Since 2011, every state has passed some sort of legislation addressing autonomous vehicles. ❑ True ❑ False

16. The U.S. Department of Transportation published the Federal Automated Vehicle Policy to create a cohesive national framework and establish safety guidelines. ❑ True ❑ False

17. E-Discovery refers to the procedure by which parties in litigation preserve, collect, review, and exchange electronically stored information. ❑ True ❑ False

18. Once a lawsuit is filed, a company is under a duty to preserve information that is relevant to the claims or defenses relating to the litigation. ❑ True ❑ False

19. Technology assisted review (TAR) is a tool used during e-discovery to determine the relevance of large sets of documents. ❑ True ❑ False

20. Since the rise of the internet in the 1990s, data has been produced at a rate of 1.7 megabytes of data per second. ❑ True ❑ False

This summer, the Valley Community Legal Foundation This summer, the Valley Community Legal Foundation sponsored an online auction as part of its first “No Jacket sponsored an online auction as part of its first “No Jacket Required Virtual Gala.” The following article profiles Required Virtual Gala.” The following article profiles winning bidder Steven Gubner and his firm, Brutzkus winning bidder Steven Gubner and his firm, Brutzkus Gubner Rozansky Seror Weber LLP. We thank them Gubner Rozansky Seror Weber LLP. We thank them for their generous donation to the VCLF and their for their generous donation to the VCLF and their ongoing commitment to community service.ongoing commitment to community service.


By Michael D. White


Giving Back:

Photo by Ron Murray

One Firm’s Legacy of One Firm’s Legacy of Serving the CommunityServing the Community


N THE JEWISH FAITH, IT’S CALLED TZEDAKAH, THE moral obligation to give aid, assistance and money to those in need and one that Steven Gubner takes to heart. “My father is a blue-collar guy who worked six days a week,” says Gubner, partner at the law fi rm of Brutzkus Gubner Rozansky Seror Weber LLP. “When I was growing up, I saw him participate in giving back, whether it was buying somebody on the street a lunch or a dinner, or writing a check to help a charity. Large or small, the amount didn’t matter; he always tried. My father wasn’t among the top ten donors to be certain, but he always made sure he found something he could do to help.” One of the largest law fi rms in the San Fernando Valley, Woodland Hills-based Brutzkus Gubner’s 25 attorneys handle multi-billion dollar insolvency, bankruptcy, intellectual property, labor and employment and litigation matters for Fortune 500 and other clients in the apparel and fashion, fi nance, entertainment, new media, and real estate industries. Gubner was counsel of record in the U.S. Supreme Court 2014 chapter 7 bankruptcy case, Law v. Siegel. Brutzkus has a heralded reputation in the garment industry, and Rozansky is considered to be next in line. Seror is one of the most respected chapter 7 trustees in California, and Weber works closely with Gubner on insolvency matters. Most recently, the fi rm was recognized as a “Best Law Firm” by U.S. News & World Report in the practice areas

of bankruptcy and commercial litigation, recognition that is based entirely on peer review, while earlier this year, eleven of the fi rm’s attorneys were selected by Thomson Reuters as 2016 Southern California Super Lawyers. As busy as the fi rm is, its lawyers and support staff alike devote considerable time and effort to community service and giving back. Gubner and his colleagues make

giving back a core value at the fi rm and support active involvement in dozens of community causes. “The opportunity to serve the community helps younger associates,” says Gubner, who has served for more than 18 years on the Board of Directors of United Cerebral Palsy. “I learned a long time ago to leave my bulldog lawyer hat at the door. I grew up seeing a lot of my colleagues and friends get divorced, have few friends, and have serious social problems because they couldn’t turn off the aggressive nature that lawyers are sort of inbred with and taught to show as a sign of strength or ability.” Brutzkus and others agree that it helps make better lawyers. It’s important for professionals, Gubner says, to have “multiple facets” to their personality. “It’s not just about winning and losing…it’s about understanding what motivates people to make certain decisions and certainly participating in a non-monetary result like a pro bono case or contributing to a good cause helps that.” For instance, the fi rm recently negotiated a multi-million dollar settlement on behalf of a local trustee and donated $10,000 to the defendants’ charity. In the Gospel Truth chapter 11 case, the fi rm donated all undistributed funds to United Cerebral Palsy.


The fi rm’s attorneys and staff, says Gubner, have each “found something they can connect with” as individuals devote their time giving back to Providence Tarzana Medical Center, IBD Support Foundation, Fred Jordan Mission, and City of Hope, among others. Partner Mark Brutzkus sits on the National Board of Trustees of National Jewish Health, the Board of deToledo High School, and is active in (and a former President of) the City of Hope’s Apparel Industries Group. Partner David Seror teams with his wife to hold toy drives and collect Halloween candy for bed-ridden children at Providence Tarzana Medical Center, with more hours invested in aiding the homeless at the Fred Jordan Mission in Los Angeles. Citing his family’s medical history and his father’s psychiatric profession, partner Nick Rozansky joined IBDSF’s Board of Directors and was honored at its 7th Annual Evening of Inspiration in 2014. Partner Corey Weber—a specialist in bankruptcy, business and commercial litigation—is serving a three-year term as a volunteer lawyer representative to the Ninth Circuit Judicial Conference, which is held “for the purpose of considering the business of the courts and advising means of improving the administration of justice within such circuit.”

In September, Brutzkus Gubner was lauded as the law fi rm with the largest level of participation in the Annual Justice Jog 5K Run/Walk in Century City for the second year in a row. Held in partnership with the Greater Los Angeles Association of Legal Administrators, the event raises funds to support the Court Appointed Special Advocates of Los Angeles (CASA), a non-profi t organization that recruits, trains and manages court-appointed volunteers to assist foster children throughout the region. Apparel industry attorney Deborah Greaves serves on its Board of Directors. Another event supported by the fi rm is the annual Food from the Bar campaign–one of the Los Angeles Food Bank’s largest events that raises funds from members of the legal community, enough for almost two million meals for those in need. In May, a group of Brutzkus Gubner attorneys, families and friends joined dozens of other law fi rms at the group’s annual Volunteer Day at its food bank in Vernon. The fi rm took the lead in sorting and packing almost 4.5 tons of bread items and helped contribute to a total of 7,300 meals for the community. The previous December, nearly 25 of the fi rm’s lawyers and staff formed an assembly line to pack more than 3,760 food packages for distribution among Los Angeles County’s needy schoolchildren and senior citizens. One of the core elements in the fi rm’s value system is pro bono legal work, with the fi rm taking on as many

as fi ve pro bono cases a year. Particularly active in pro bono work is partner Jeffrey Kobulnick, who left Big Law to join the fi rm in 2012, bringing extensive experience in the areas of copyright and trademark infringement, unfair competition, false advertising, and Internet-related intellectual property issues. He also brought along a heartfelt commitment to providing pro bono

28 Valley Lawyer ■ DECEMBER 2016

Michael D. White is editor of Valley Lawyer magazine. He is the author of four published books and has worked in business journalism for more than 35 years. Before joining the staff of the SFVBA, he worked as Web Content Editor for the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. He can be reached at [email protected].

legal assistance to “people who feel they have no other recourse.” Kobulnick currently serves as a coordinator for Bet Tzedek Legal Services’ Holocaust Survivors Justice Network, which provides free, comprehensive legal assistance to Holocaust survivors seeking reparations from Germany for property expropriated during World War II. In 2009, his work was recognized with the national organization’s Elyse S. Kline Pro Bono Lawyer of the Year Award. “I’m looking for more ways to do pro bono work,” says Kobulnick, who’s been involved in volunteer work since his days as a law student at the Franklin Pierce Law Center, and has been honored multiple times with the Wiley W. Manuel Award from the State of California for distinguished pro bono legal services. Kobulnick has also coordinated attorney participation in Lawyers for Literacy, an annual event that benefi ts “Everybody Wins! Los Angeles,” a nonprofi t literacy program helping children improve their reading skills and self-esteem. His work with that group earned him the Lynford Lardner Community Service Award in 2006. In addition, Kobulnick has volunteered with a number of charitable organizations, most notably the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society (LLS), having founded and served twice as a captain of LLS Light the Night Walk teams to raise awareness and funds to cure blood cancer. In 2013, Kobulnick was a candidate for LLS’s Man of the Year for his work on a campaign that raised over $575,000 for LLS research in just ten weeks.

What engenders the commitment of so many to do so much for those in need, from dispossessed and bed-ridden children to Holocaust survivors and at-risk teens? Over the years, Steve Gubner has made a point of taking his three children along with him to help at charitable functions the fi rm has been involved in, including building a house with Habitat for Humanity or taking a day to bring a sense of normalcy to the abused and neglected children and adolescents at Casa Pacifi ca. Several years ago, Gubner was standing in line at Kohl’s Department Store with a cart full of clothes selected by one of the 100 at-risk youngsters participating in the Kohl’s for Kids program.

“We put up $100 dollars for each kid, which Kohl’s matched,” he recalls. “In addition, they offered to cut the prices on everything in the store by 50 percent. The kids arrived on a bus, we met them, and then took them shopping. Kids being who they are, “the fi rst thing they’d do is head for the ear buds, head phones and games, with their teachers steering them toward shoes and clothes and more practical stuff.” With a cart fi lled with shoes, clothing and other more practical stuff for two youngsters, Gubner told the kids that they could go back to the fun stuff if there was any money left over after they checked-out. “We were in line to check out and my son said ‘I’ll be right back.’ He went back to the headphone area, returned with a pair of headphones and said, ‘Dad, I want to buy these for these kids with my own money. I want it to be my gift to them.’” Tzedakah…by example.

Thank You for Supporting Blanket the Homeless!


Thank You for Supporting Blanket the Homeless!Thank You for Supporting Blanket the Homeless!

Name_________________________________________________________________________________________

Firm/Company__________________________________________________________________________________

Address _______________________________________________________________________________________

Phone ________________________________________ Email ___________________________________________

Credit Card No. ___________________________________Expiration Date__________________________________

Make checks payable to VCLF of the SFVBA. The Valley Community Legal Foundation (VCLF) of the SFVBA is a registered 501(c)(3) organization (Tax ID No. 95-3397334). Your contribution is tax-deductible to the extent allowed by law.

Mail donation to VCLF, 5567 Reseda Blvd., Ste. 200, Tarzana, CA 91356 or fax to (818) 227-0499. For more information, please call (818) 227-0490.

A $75 donation buys 10 blankets. Please accept my donation for $________.

Share the spirit of the Holidays – Help Blanket

BLANKET THE HOMELESSA Project of the San Fernando Valley Bar Association and

the Valley Community Legal Foundation of the SFVBA

the Homeless when they need it most!

Since 1995, the SFVBA has delivered more than 40,000 blankets to homeless and battered Since 1995, the SFVBA has delivered more than 40,000 blankets to homeless and battered women shelters in the San Fernando Valley. SFVBA members are invited to assist with women shelters in the San Fernando Valley. SFVBA members are invited to assist with the blanket distribution and volunteer for a legal clinic on December 10, 2016 at 8:30 a.m. the blanket distribution and volunteer for a legal clinic on December 10, 2016 at 8:30 a.m.

at L.A. Family Housing, 7817 Lankershim Boulevard, North Hollywood.at L.A. Family Housing, 7817 Lankershim Boulevard, North Hollywood.


N A PLEA FOR PERSONAL protection, actress Cindy Lee Garcia was denied any sort of relief by the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals for a movie producer’s distortion of her fi ve-second performance in a fi lm that sparked worldwide controversy and death threats.1

In Garcia v. Google, the court initially entered a mandatory injunction requiring Google to remove the fi lm on the basis that Garcia had a “fairly debatable” copyright claim in her performance. Later, though, the judges revisited their initial ruling and reversed in an en banc decision.2

What is particularly troubling about Garcia’s case is that she never signed a contract to transfer her rights to the movie producer. The producer

misled Garcia by casting her for a role in the fi lm, which she was told would be an action-adventure thriller set in ancient Arabia and entitled Desert Warrior.3 Even more troubling is that the actual fi lm, renamed Innocence of Muslims, misrepresented Garcia’s role by dubbing over her lines with a voice that asked, “Is your Mohammed a child molester?”4

Shortly after the fi lm was uploaded to YouTube and translated into Arabic, numerous violent protests occurred across the Middle East, with some claiming a causative link between the release of the fi lm and the 2012 attack on the American diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya.5

Unfortunately for Garcia, the Ninth Circuit noted that she would have had better prospects under European

copyright laws, where performers have the “moral right” to object to any distortion of their performances that would be prejudicial to their reputations.6

Moral Rights vs. Economic RightsThe United States differs from many countries with respect to the basic philosophy of its copyright law. The United States dominates as the world’s premier exporter of entertainment content, through its utilitarian philosophy, which grants rights to those who fuel its economy.7

As such, U.S. law affords copyright protection to writers, musicians, and actors who get paid in return for access to their products.8 According to one defi nitive source, the fi nancial incentives and statutory protection benefi tted not

Jasmine Aarabi is a third year student at Loyola Law School, where she serves as an editor of the Entertainment Law Review. She can be reached at [email protected].

CREATIVITY CONFLICT:

the United States Europe

By Jasmine Aarabi

Differing Protection in


only artists, but American society as a whole.9

In contrast to the United States’ exceptional philosophy, which limits exclusive copyright rights to the “economic rights” of authors, European copyright statutes protect the “moral rights,” or the non-economic interests of authors, based on the view that an artist’s work is an extension of his or her personality.10 Moral rights refer to the spiritual, non-economic, and personal nature of an artist’s work that plays an important role in the creative process so that the artist’s spirit and personality is injected into the work.11

The two most common of these moral rights are attribution and integrity. The moral right of attribution refers to “the right to claim authorship of a work,” whereas the moral right of integrity is “the right to object to modifi cations of one’s work” that would be “prejudicial to his or her honor or reputation.”12

Countries that apply moral rights, or “natural rights,” focus on protecting the individual author, while Anglo-American countries lean toward protecting the owner of the copyright, whether that be the author, publisher, broadcaster, individual or corporation.13

Audiovisual Performers in the United StatesWhile the United States prefers to concentrate rights and economic benefi ts in the hands of corporate management, European countries integrate economic effi ciency with the audiovisual performer’s welfare, where such welfare should allow a performer to object to the producer’s distortion of his or her performance.14

America’s failure to adequately embrace the doctrine of moral rights has led many commentators to conclude that the scope of copyright protection for the personal rights of the country’s artists is insuffi cient.15

Issues that may arise when determining copyright ownership in an

audiovisual performer’s performance include whether the performer’s contribution to a work qualifi es as work-made-for-hire, and therefore denies the performer any copyright ownership/protection; and whether a performance not qualifying as a work-made-for-hire is an independent contribution to a work and thus provides copyright ownership/protection to the audiovisual performer under the Copyright Act’s defi nition of “joint-authorship.”16

Under the work-made-for-hire doctrine, an audiovisual performer (e.g., an actor) who makes contributions to an audiovisual work (such as a fi lm) is considered the “employee” of the executive producer.17 The producer’s role is equated to that of an “employer,” which entitles the producer to benefi t from its “author” status under §101 of the Copyright Act. This provides the producer, not the performer, with exclusive rights to the audiovisual work.18

These issues are especially prevalent in the U.S. fi lm industry since motion pictures are inherently collaborative types of work, and often qualify as works-made-for-hire, which thereby provides the hiring party, usually the producer/fi nancier, copyright ownership over the collaborations.19

Moral Rights in American and International Copyright LawsIn 1990, the only time the United States incorporated moral rights into its copyright laws was in 1990, when Congress amended the Copyright Act by adopting the Visual Artists Rights Act (VARA). )20 This amendment, however, has limitations in that it extends protection only to visual artists (e.g., printers and photographers) and thereby excludes audiovisual artists such as actors from protection.21

It has been argued that VARA’s enactment refl ects Congress’s belief that protection of visual art “meets a


special societal need, and its protection and preservation serve an important public interest,” but surprisingly, audiovisual art did not qualify as a “special societal need.”22

The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), one of 17 specialized agencies within the United Nations, has advocated for audiovisual performers’ rights over their recordings as well as a share in the proceeds from their commercial exploitation through its philosophies of moral rights protection.23

Since 1996, however, the WIPO has encountered two main obstacles in trying to accomplish a treaty on audiovisual performances: the transfer of rights and the initial ownership of audiovisual performers’ rights.24

As fi lm industry lobbyists exerted intense economic pressure to exclude audiovisual performers from provisions that were already afforded to audio performers, EU member nations began taking steps to ensure that audiovisual performers received equal protection. By implementing EU Directive 92/100/EEC (EU Directive), the 28-member nation bloc set forth several principles and rights of audiovisual performers: fi rst, “The principal director of a cinematographic or audiovisual work shall be considered its author”; second, “Any illegal fi xation of a performer’s live performances is an act of piracy”; third, “Audiovisual performers have the exclusive right to distribute, authorize or prohibit the broadcasting of their performances made via wireless means, and other communications to the public”; and fourth, “Audiovisual performers have the right to authorize or prohibit the rental and lending of the fi xation of their performances.”25

On June 24, 2012, following the EU Directive, WIPO adopted the Beijing Treaty on Audiovisual Performances, which had been negotiated with the goal of protecting audiovisual performers.26 Through more than a

decade of negotiations, the United States, India, and Mexico compromised with the EU regarding the transfer of rights from performers to producers.27

The talks resulted in Article 5(1)(ii) of the Beijing Treaty which provides protection to audiovisual performers by granting them the right “to object to any distortion, mutilation or other modifi cation of their performances that would be prejudicial to their reputation, taking due account of the nature of audiovisual fi xations,” where such rights will continue even after their death but until the expiration of their economic rights, under Article 5(2).28

Should Audiovisual Performers Have Moral Rights?According to Ninth Circuit Court Judge Alex Kozinski’s dissent in Garcia v. Google, the U.S. Copyright Offi ce contradicted itself by denying Garcia copyright protection since it was a member of the U.S. delegation that signed the Beijing Treaty and was “intimately engaged” in negotiating provisions to protect rights of performers.29 If the Treaty’s key provisions were inconsistent with U.S. copyright law, Judge Kozinski commented that it would be inconceivable that the Copyright Offi ce not only signed the Treaty, but also praised it as “an important step forward in protecting the performances of television and fi lm actors throughout the world.”30

Through exploring the contrasting philosophies of American and European Union copyright laws, as well as the Beijing Treaty,31 it would serve the United States well to embody certain principles, such as moral rights, that are already afforded in European nations, and which would bring audiovisual performers to an equal standing with other performers.

1 Garcia v. Google, Inc., 786 F.3d 733 (9th Cir. 2015). 2 Id. (The court held that Garcia “failed to show that she was likely to succeed on the merits of a copyright infringement claim because she was not the author of the film, her performance was not copyrightable, she

70% of Americanswill need some type of Long Term Care. Whats your plan?

• LIFETIME Benefits

• Optional Cost of Living

Adjustment (3%)

• 10-pay, 20- pay or Single-pay options

• Guaranteed Premiums!

• Backed by A+ rated carrier

Learn more at Corpstrat.com/

Corporate Strategies IncMartin Levy, CLU, Principal

1 800 914 3564 www.Corpstrat.com

Ca. Lic 0C24367

ThePerfectLTCSolutiontm


or [email protected]

Contact me to discuss a very unique offering.


provides:


disclaimed joint authorship of the film, and she never fixed her acting performance in a tangible medium, as required by 17 U.S.C.S. § 101.”) 3 Id. 4 Id. at 737. 5 David Brock, The Benghazi Hoax, Huffington Post, October 21, 2013. 6 Garcia v. Google, Inc., 786 F.3d 733, 746 (9th Cir. 2015). 7 Adler Bernard, The Proposed New WIPO Treaty for Increased Protection for Audiovisual Performers: Its Provisions and Its Domestic and International Implications, 12 Fordham Intell. Prop. Media & Ent. L.J. 1089 (2002). 8 Id. 9 Id. 10 Cyrill, P. Rigamonti, The Conceptual Transformation of Moral Rights, 55 Am. J. Comp. L. 67, 67-8 (2007). 11 Mass. Museum of Contemporary Art Found., Inc. v. Buchel, 593 F.3d 38, 49 (1st Cir. 2010). 12 Susan P. Liemer, How We Lost Our Moral Rights and the Door Closed on Non-Economic Values in Copyright, 5 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 1, 4 (2005). 13 Peter Burger, The Berne Convention: Its History and Its Key Role in the Future, 3 J.L. & Tech. 1, 7 (1988). 14 Guy Pessach, The Beijing Treaty on Audiovisual Performances - The Return of the North?, 55 IDEA 79, 85 (2014). 15 Roberta Rosenthal Kwall, Copyright and the Moral Right: Is an American Marriage Possible?, 38 Vand. L. Rev. 1, 18 (1985); F. Jay Dougherty, Not a Spike Lee Joint? Issues in the Authorship of Motion Pictures Under U.S. Copyright Law, 49 UCLA L. Rev. 225, 228 (2001); Adler Bernard, The Proposed New WIPO Treaty for Increased Protection for Audiovisual Performers: Its Provisions and Its Domestic and International Implications, 12 Fordham Intell. Prop. Media & Ent. L.J. 1089 (2002). 16 F. Jay Dougherty, Not a Spike Lee Joint? Issues in the Authorship of Motion Pictures Under U.S. Copyright Law, 49 UCLA L. Rev. 225, 228 (2001); 17 U.S.C. § 101 (1976). 17 Adler Bernard, The Proposed New WIPO Treaty for Increased Protection for Audiovisual Performers: Its Provisions and Its Domestic and International Implications, 12 Fordham Intell. Prop. Media & Ent. L.J. 1089, 1100 (2002). 18 Id. 19 F. Jay Dougherty, Not a Spike Lee Joint? Issues in the Authorship of Motion Pictures Under U.S. Copyright Law, 49 UCLA L. Rev. 225, 228 (2001).20 17 U.S. Code § 106A. 21 Susan P. Liemer, How We Lost Our Moral Rights and the Door Closed on Non-Economic Values in Copyright, 5 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 1, 3-4 (2005). 22 Mass. Museum of Contemporary Art Found., Inc. v. Buchel, 593 F.3d 38, 49 (1st Cir. 2010). 23 WIPO, Performers’ Rights – Background Brief. 24 Guy Pessach, The Beijing Treaty on Audiovisual Performances - The Return of the North?, 55 IDEA 79, 85 (2014). 25 Adler Bernard, The Proposed New WIPO Treaty for Increased Protection for Audiovisual Performers: Its Provisions and Its Domestic and International Implications, 12 Fordham Intell. Prop. Media & Ent. L.J. 1089, 1097-8 (2002). 26 51 I.L.M. 1211 (2012). 27 Id. 28 WIPO, Beijing Treaty on Audiovisual Performances. 29 Garcia v. Google, Inc., 786 F.3d 733, 751 (9th Cir. 2015) (Kozinski, dissenting); U.S. Copyright Office, Annual Report of the Register of Copyrights, p. 16-17 (2012), available at www.copyright.gov/reports/annual/2011/ar2011.pdf. 30 Id. 31 WIPO, Beijing Treaty on Audiovisual Performances.


Barry L. Pinsky is a Financial Advisor and First Vice President with UBS Financial Services in Encino. A Certifi ed Financial Planner, Chartered Financial Consultant and Chartered Life Underwriter, Pinsky is an Associate Member of the SFVBA. He can be reached at [email protected].

TTORNEYS ARE TRAINED TO LOOK AHEAD, TO

plan for the future; retirement planning is

not foreign to law practices. However, due to

the complexities inherent in our modern society, the

details involved in the various plan options–401(k), profit

sharing, defined benefit, safe harbor, SIMPLE–may often

appear daunting. A bit of clarification and perspective

might be helpful.

Many working adults in our grandparents’ and

parents’ generations spent most of their working lives

employed in one profession, or by one company. When

they retired, they probably received a monthly pension

from their long-time employer along with a Social Security

check that kept them comfortably housed, fed, and

provided with a bit of spare spending money for the

balance of their lives.

By contrast, today’s generations work for multiple

employers over many careers, while Social Security faces

never-ending political and financial challenges, causing

uncertainty to future beneficiaries. Retirement planning is

mostly an individual’s responsibility.

Some financial and retirement planners estimate

that Americans will require 70% or more of their pre-

retirement income to sustain their lifestyles after they stop

working.1 For those not blessed with a retirement pension

or substantial 401 (k) or IRA account–or the good

fortune of a substantial inheritance, or a winning lottery

ticket–the obligation for retirement planning cannot be

transferred or avoided.

Fortunately, the federal government has defined a

variety of savings and investing options to help facilitate

the task of planning one’s retirement. Perhaps the most

common, and often a highly efficient path to helping build

a retirement income stream, is through an employer’s

formal retirement plan.

For attorneys, the options for establishing and

funding retirement plans are varied, and the optimal

choices may differ from one firm to another, so it’s

important for employers and employees alike to

understand the advantages and disadvantages which

accompany each type of plan.

By Barry L. Pinsky


Tax Advantages

Business retirement plans afford a number of distinct

tax advantages. Contributions made by an employer

to accounts benefiting employees are deductible from

the employer’s business income. Contributions made

by employees–other than to Roth accounts, and up to

certain limits–are also deductible from the employee’s

personal income for the year to which the contributions

are attributed. Funds invested in retirement plans grow

tax-deferred, until such time as withdrawals are made.

Most commonly, withdrawals begin after retirement, at

which time the account holder is usually in a lower tax

bracket.

Most retirement plans offered through private

employers are one of two types–defined contribution

plans or defined benefit plans.2 All formal business

retirement plans, both defined contribution and defined

benefit, are subject to ERISA, the Employee Retirement

Income Security Act of 1974.

ERISA rules set standards for participant eligibility

and inclusion, vesting schedules, benefit levels, and plan

management in order to assure that employees derive

appropriate value from the overall contributions by their

employer to the retirement plan as a whole. While all

plans are subject to ERISA regulations, contribution

levels, reporting documentation, investment options, and

plan management details differ among the various plan

types, with each offering specific options and featuring

specific requirements and limitations.

A Variety of Plans

Many employer retirement plans offered at law firms are

defined contribution plans.3 The employee and/or the

employer make contributions to investment accounts

credited to each employee’s benefit. At retirement,

an employee receives the accumulated value of his

and his employer’s contributions, plus earnings on the

investments purchased with those contributions. Various

mandated employer contributions and/or actuarial tests

assure that appropriate benefits accrue to the employees

in an equitable manner.

One of the simplest types of plan commonly utilized

by law practices is the Simplified Employee Pensions, or

SEP plan.4 The employer establishes accounts for each

eligible employee and contributes a uniform percentage

of pay to each account. The maximum, employer-only

contribution level is 25% of pay up to $53,000 for

2016.5 No annual documentation is required by the

IRS, while SEPs do not have the requirement to file

form 5500, and SEP-IRA contributions are not included

on an employee’s W-2 form. Financial institutions

handling employees’ SEP IRA accounts provide the

IRS and employees with an annual statement indicating

contributions and fair market value information on Form

5498. Any distributions are reported on form 1099-R.

A major advantage of SEP plans is that contribution

levels are optional each year. A SEP plan may be

especially attractive for a sole practitioner due to

the ease of start-up and operation, the flexibility of

contribution level from year to year, and the relatively

high limits. However, in larger practices, the requirement

to cover a significant number of employees may add

unaffordable costs.

A SIMPLE (Savings Incentive Match Plan for

Employees) plan may represent more manageable costs

for a larger organization with up to 100 employees.

A SIMPLE plan collects voluntary salary reduction

contributions from employees (to $12,500 in 2016, with

an additional $3,000 option for employees over age

50), along with employer matches (up to 3% match of

compensation for contributing participants most years,

or 2% of compensation for every eligible employee every

year). Employee contributions are optional; employer

contributions are mandatory as per plan. SIMPLE plans,

like SEP’s, do not require annual filing or testing. The

ease of plan maintenance, along with the limitations of

required employer contributions, may make a SIMPLE

plan appealing. However, the lower level of permitted

employee deferrals may be inadequate for some

practitioners.

Another form of defined contribution plan which

has been utilized by many law firms is the profit sharing

plan (PSP).3 A PSP requires annual filing of Form 5500,

which is generally provided by a CPA or third-party

plan administrator engaged by the plan sponsor. Major

advantages of PSPs include high annual employer

contribution limits ($53,000 for 2016) and flexibility as

annual employer contribution is discretionary.

Each plan must have a specific formula for

allocation of employer contributions among all of the

eligible employee participants if, in fact, employer

contributions are made, often by percentage of total

firm compensation, and a multiple-employee plan must

be tested regularly by a qualified actuary to assure that

benefits do not improperly accrue to highly compensated

employees.

Profit sharing plans may be utilized in conjunction

with another complementary type of plan, often with

a 401(k) plan which then permits employee salary

deferrals. However, if the employer plan is a combined

profit sharing/401(k) plan, the annual contribution limit

remains a total of $53,000 for 2016.


The most popular form of a defined contribution plan,

a 401(k) Plan, has become America’s primary retirement

savings vehicle. The IRS has estimated that over 50

million Americans participate in 401(k) plans through their

employers, holding assets in excess of $3 trillion.6

A 401(k) plan allows employees to defer a portion

of salary pre-tax–or post-tax in optional Roth 401(k)s

permitted by some employers–for investment in the

individual’s separate retirement account. Many 401(k)

plans include an employer matching contribution up to

a certain percentage of a participant’s salary. Employee

and employer contributions, along with accumulated

earnings, are deferred from taxation in traditional

401(k) plans until distribution. Employees may defer up

to $18,000 in salary in 2016 ($24,000 for individuals

over age 50). As mentioned above, a 401(k) plan in

combination with a PSP, may allow overall plan limits

for employer and employee salary deferral as high as

$53,000 per employee participant in 2016.

Complicated Rules and Regulations

For firms with a substantial number of employees, the

401(k) plan is a useful vehicle which can work well to

benefit all members of a law practice. However, the

regulations for establishing, maintaining, and testing

401(k) plans are complex. These rules are designed

to help assure that all employee participants and their

participating beneficiaries receive an appropriate portion

of the retirement contributions made and that plans are

not top-heavy, with the benefits flowing inordinately to a

few senior executive participants.

For principals who have a desire to quickly

accumulate the greatest benefit for employees in the

shortest possible time, a defined benefit plan (DBP) may

be of particular interest. Unlike defined contribution plans

which specify the employer and employee contribution

levels which are permitted and/or required, a DBP

specifies the pension benefit which is promised to the

employee at a future retirement date.

The value of accumulated savings from employee

deferrals, employer contributions, and investment returns

in a defined contribution plan (SEP, SIMPLE, profit

sharing, or 401(k)) is unknown in advance, and depends

upon contribution levels and investment performance.

The accumulated value to the employees is ultimately

at the risk of each individual participant. On the other

hand, the pension payout from a defined benefit plan

is specified in advance, based on plan documents and

employment history, and the risk of performance is on the

employer.

With a DBP, the sponsor guarantees a specific

monthly pension benefit to employees based on a

specific formula. The calculations utilize factors relating to

each participant’s employment tenure, salary history, and

age in order to determine appropriate pension levels. The

plan is usually funded by employer contributions, with the

sponsor accepting responsibility for making investment

and management decisions, and assuming the risk of

plan performance. In the case of a funding shortfall, the

employer may be required to increase contributions.

In the event of excess accumulation, funding may be

cut back. Each plan is regularly reviewed and tested by

an independent actuary to evaluate the adequacy of the

plan funding levels and to verify that the plan complies

with ERISA requirements. As with other retirement plan

structures, a defined benefit plan is forbidden from

assigning inappropriately excessive contributions to the

benefit of highly compensated employees.

However, since it costs more to fund the pensions

of more senior, more highly compensated members of

a firm, defined benefit plans do generally require greater

contribution levels for senior staff than might otherwise

be permitted in many defined contribution plans. Therein

lays the opportunity and the appeal of DBPs for some

firms, as they often permit significantly higher funding

levels than any other type of retirement plan, and the

owners of the firm often realize the greatest percentage

of ultimate retirement benefit.

As one would expect, defined benefit plans are

the most complex and the most costly business

retirement plans to establish and maintain. Before

seriously contemplating the feasibility of a DBP, a careful

evaluation of a firm’s employee census and long-term

goals should be undertaken.

ERISA regulations include provisions for a wide

variety of additional business retirement plan options,

including cash balance plans, employee stock option

plans, and money purchase plans. However, in general,

these options are less attractive or infeasible for most

legal practices.

As retirement pensions become a thing of the

past and Social Security benefits will only go so far,

a knowledge of retirement plan options and careful

planning and implementation are key to meeting future

attainable financial goals.

1 ”Choosing a Retirement Solution,” IRS Publication 3998 (12-2014), p. 1.2 Id. at 1.3 ABA Retirement Funds Website: www.abaretirement.com. “ABA Retirement Funds Program Plan Design,” ABA Retirement Funds 2015.4 American Bar Association Website: www.americanbar.org/publications/gp_solo/2013/july_august/reallife_retirement_strategies_solos.html, “Real-Life Retirement Strategies for Solos,” American Bar Association, Vol. 30, No., 4, 2013.5 Contribution limits for 2016 are taken from the IRS Website for Retirement Plans: www.irs.gov/RetirementPlans.6 ”Choosing a Retirement Solution,” IRS Publication 2998 (12-2014), p. 4.

Providing Excellent Products to Companies of All Sizes7915 Ruffner Ave. • Van Nuys, CA 91406800-350-1672 •www.mercurydoc.com

WC5890i• 90 pages/min.• Copier/Printer/Scanner• 200-pg. Document

Feeder• Dual Head Scanner

WC7835i• 35 pages/min.• Black and White and

Color Copies• Two 1,500-sheet and

two 520-sheet cassettes

$155$200

Two Economical CopiersAny CFO Would Love.

Call us at 800-350-1672 for great deals on these and other Xerox copiers.PERMONTH

PERMONTH

One month free forProVisors members!

One month free forProVisors members!

Lease any 35+ pages/min. A3 copier and get an Oculus Rift!Year-End Offer!(thru Dec. 31, 2016)



(818) 856-0232

5567 Reseda Boulevard | Suite 200 | Tarzana, CA 91356

www.valleybarmediationcenter.com

Helping diverse populations in San Fernando ValleyHelping diverse populations in San Fernando Valley and beyond gain access to justiceand beyond gain access to justice

Resolving disputes & educating the publicResolving disputes & educating the public

For those engaged in litigation or trying to avoid itFor those engaged in litigation or trying to avoid it

Highly qualified panel of professionals offeringHighly qualifi ed panel of professionals offering mediations at exceptionally affordable ratesmediations at exceptionally affordable rates

Mediators with expertise in wide variety ofMediators with expertise in wide variety of disputes practice highest ethical standardsdisputes practice highest ethical standards

Learn the benefits of using mediationLearn the benefi ts of using mediation through educational and training programsthrough educational and training programs

5567 Reseda Blvd., Suite 200 | Tarzana, CA | 91356 Tel (818) 227-0490 | Fax (818) 227-0499 | www.sfvba.org

Reserve meeting space for only $150 per day!

COFFEE AND COLDDRINKS SERVICE

AMPLE FREE PARKING COPY MACHINE ACCESS

WI-FI ACCESS PROFESSIONAL STAFF SUPPORT

Need a Meeting Space forMediations or Depositions ?

600 square-foot conference room easily accommodates 20 people.

Spacious Breakout Room


VER THE PAST YEAR IN this column, we’ve seen several heartfelt stories of individuals who have confronted hardship and adversity with courage and determination and how those courageous people have benefi tted from the generosity and commitment of remarkable service organizations like Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA), Safe Passage, Haven Hills and the Boys and Girls Clubs–all of which are supported by the San Fernando valley Bar Association’s Valley Community Legal Foundation (VCLF) and the generous donations of committed, community Valley residents. What many people are not aware of is that in addition to supporting these and other worthwhile charitable organizations, the VCLF encourages and provides scholarships to qualifi ed students pursuing a legal education like Myrna Velasquez. Ever since Myrna immigrated to the United States at the age of 13, her father taught her that school should would be her number one priority. “Education has always been a big part of my life” said Myrna. ”I always knew I wanted to be successful and I knew I would accomplish my goals by educating myself.” In high school, she realized that success at her studies would be the

key to becoming a strong, independent woman. Her resolve paid dividends, and after completing her undergraduate degree in political science, she earned a master’s degree in public administration. The subsequent years she spent working for an immigration attorney awakened the aspiration of becoming an attorney herself. Working with people of different backgrounds taught her that a career in the law would be more than

just a job–it would give her the tools to help bring struggling families together and help reunite estranged family members with their loved ones. Having grown up in Latin America, Myrna knows all too well the trials

of poverty, the hardships of fi nancial instability, and having to face the gut-wrenching choice between clothing, food, and education. “I come from a humble family, a family that has been of great support to me,” said Myrna. “My father is a construction worker, and even though [he never earned] a lot of money, he has always helped me fi nancially as best as he could. My economic situation is tough, as law school is very expensive. And there are tremendous sacrifi ces that I have had to make in order to pay for classes. I take nothing for granted. My hard work scholastically has paid off, as I have been blessed to receive scholarships that have funded a portion of my legal education. I am eternally grateful!” Myrna is now in her second year of law school. Looking back, she thanks God for giving her the knowledge to lead her life in the most positive way possible. Looking forward, she is thankful for the Valley Community Legal Foundation for their encouragement and support. “Law school has made me a different woman—a woman with bigger dreams and hopes,” said Myrna. Law school is by far one of the most diffi cult things that I have experienced. “It has taught me about stress, anxiety, and

Supporting our Future Valley Legal Scholars

VALLEY COMMUNITY LEGAL FOUNDATION OF THE SFVBA

[email protected]

LAURENCE N. KALDORPresident

About the VCLF of the SFVBA

The Valley Community Legal Foundation is the charitable arm of the San Fernando Valley Bar Association. The Foundation’s mission is to support the legal needs of the youth, victims of domestic violence, and veterans of the San Fernando Valley. The Foundation also provides educational grants to qualifi ed students pursuing legal careers. The Foundation relies on donations to fund its work. To donate to the VCLF or to learn more, visit www.thevclf.org and help us make a difference in our community.


doubt. But I know that everything that I am going through is worth it because becoming an attorney is my greatest dream,” she said. “All of us who have received fi nancial help from this great Bar Foundation are extremely lucky and humble to receive such help, as I am. I cannot wait to pass the Bar exam so that I can utilize my law license and begin to give back by helping the less fortunate people of the San Fernando Valley.”

VCLF AT WORKEvery year the VCLF is proud to offer fi nancial scholarships to qualifi ed and worthy students from the San Fernando Valley who are pursuing a legal education. We are all encouraged by the amazing people that we support like Myrna Velasquez. On behalf of the VCLF, I truly thank you for your continued support, and I wish you a healthy and joyous holiday season a most prosperous New Year!

Gerardo E. AlcantaraGraves and King LLPGlendaleCivil Litigation

James AndradeThe Burbank Firm, L.C.BurbankBusiness Law

Courtney E. ArnoldBoyamian Law Inc.GlendaleFamily Law

Nabil R. AtallaAtalla Law, APCEncinoImmigration and Naturalization

Gina AubryLewitt HackmanEncinoParalegal

Braden M. CancillaLaw Offi ces of Braden M. CancillaPasadenaImmigration and Naturalization

Magdalena CasasGranada HillsLaw Student

Atyria Shantell ClarkThe Community Law FirmSanta MonicaImmigration and Naturalization

Caitlyn DillonLewitt HackmanEncinoParalegal

Samy HarmoushKramer, Deboer & Keane LLPWoodland HillsInsurance Litigation

Katherine M. HeersemaLewitt HackmanEncinoFamily Law

Janet KerobyanVan NuysLaw Student

Michelle M. KezirianNeighborhood Legal Services of LA CountyPacoimaLitigation

Joan L. ShultzMoorparkAlternative Dispute Resolution: Arbitration and Mediation Ronald M. Supancic CFLSThe Law Collaborative Los AngelesWoodland HillsFamily Law

The following joined the SFVBAin October 2016:

NEW MEMBERS

Join us for our Holiday Celebration!

TUESDAY, DECEMBER 13, 20165:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m.

Bring an unwrapped toy or gift card for Bring an unwrapped toy or gift card for the West Valley Food Pantry and Haven the West Valley Food Pantry and Haven

Hills Domestic Violence Shelter.Hills Domestic Violence Shelter.

RSVP to (818) 227-0490, ext. 105 or [email protected].

WE RECOGNIZE THE FOLLOWING PRESIDENT’S WE RECOGNIZE THE FOLLOWING PRESIDENT’S CIRCLE MEMBERS FOR THEIR DEDICATION TO CIRCLE MEMBERS FOR THEIR DEDICATION TO THE SFVBA AND THE COMMUNITY.THE SFVBA AND THE COMMUNITY.

■ SFVBA membership for every fi rm attorney and paralegal

■ Prominent listing in Valley Lawyer and fi rm logo on President’s Circle page of SFVBA website

■ Recognition and 5% discount on tables at Bar-wide events, including Judges’ Night

■ Invitations to President’s Circle exclusive events with bench offi cers, community leaders and large fi rms

Contact SFVBA Executive Director Liz Post at (818) 227-0490, Contact SFVBA Executive Director Liz Post at (818) 227-0490, ext. 101 or [email protected] to sign up your fi rm today!ext. 101 or [email protected] to sign up your fi rm today!

Alpert Barr & Grant APLCBerglund & JohnsonBrot & Gross LLPBrutzkus Gubner Rozansky Seror Weber LLPGoldfarb, Sturman & AverbachGreenberg & Bass LLPKantor & Kantor LLPKraft, Miles & Miller LLPLewitt Hackman Shapiro Marshall & Harlan ALCMirman, Bubman & NahmiasNeighborhood Legal Services of Los Angeles CountyNemecek & ColeOldman Cooley Sallus Birnberg & ColemanParker Milliken Clark O’Hara & SamuelianPearlman, Borska & WaxPearson Simon & Warshaw LLPStone | DeanUWLA School of Law

Diversity Mixer


PHOTO GALLERY

Jack G. Cohen

OFFICE: 747.222.1550CELL: 818.445.5500

jackjack@@coheninv.comcoheninv.com

30 Years Experience in the Automobile Business

AUTOMOBILEEXPERT WITNESS

Plaintiff and Defense

Consulting with attorneys, dealers, consumers, insurance companies

Appraisals

Industry standards

Dealer fraud

Vehicle sales and leasing

Dealership practices

New and used auto transactions

Auto warranty issues

Finance documentation and analysis

Lender-dealer relationships

Wholesale & Retail

Diminished value cases


October 13, 2016 PHOTO GALLERY

$3 Million Fraud Case - Dismissed, Government Misconduct (Downtown, LA)

Murder - Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity, Jury (Van Nuys)

Medical Fraud Case - Dismissed, Preliminary Hearing (Ventura)

Domestic Violence - Not Guilty, Jury Finding of Factual Innocence (San Fernando)

$50 Million Mortgage Fraud - Dismissed, Trial Court (Downtown, LA)

DUI Case, Client Probation - Dismissed Search and Seizure (Long Beach)

Numerous Sex Off ense Accusations: Dismissed before Court (LA County)

Several Multi-Kilo Drug Cases: Dismissed due to Violation of Rights (LA County)

FIRM PARTNERS INCLUDE:

Former Senior Deputy District Attorney

UCLA and Pepperdine Law Professor

Bar-Certified Criminal Law Specialist

RECENT VICTORIES:

STATE AND FEDERAL CRIMINAL DEFENSE

Super-Lawyers Top 2.5%

A.V. –Preeminent Rating

Avvo 10/10 Superb

24/7 Immediate Intervention

Eisner Gorin LLP 14401 Sylvan Street, Suite 112 Van Nuys, CA 91401

BOUTIQUECRIMINALDEFENSE FIRM


ATTORNEY-TO-ATTORNEY REFERRALS

STATE BAR CERTIFIED WORKERS COMP SPECIALIST

Over 30 years experience-quality practice. 20% Referral fee paid to attorneys per State Bar rules. Goodchild & Duffy, PLC. (818) 380-1600.

CONTRACT ATTORNEYExperienced attorney seeks additional independent contractor assignments: Commercial Litigation, Creditor’s Rights, Bankruptcy, R.E. and Business Litigation. Former FDIC Senior Attorney. Janis Abrams (818) 314-8196.

CA, NY AND CO ATTORNEYAttorney licensed in NY, Colorado, California. Firm established 1981 • Businesses • Corporations • LLCs • Contracts • Real Estate • Trusts/Wills. Colorado, NY, California locations. Louise Aron (303) 922-7687. www.qualitylegaladvice.com.

CLASSIFIEDS

PROFESSIONAL MONITORED VISITATIONS AND PARENTING

COACHINGFamily Visitation Services • 20 years experience “offering a family friendly approach to” high conflict custody situations • Member of SVN • Hourly or extended visitations, will travel • [email protected] • (818) 968-8586/(800) 526-5179.

SUPPORT SERVICES

Galleria. High-end offices in immediately available for sublease (windows, interiors and sec. bays). Top floor of the Comerica Bank Bldg., best location in SF Valley. Adjacent to both 405 and 101 fwy on/off ramps. Would be leasing from AV rated law firm, Levinson Arshonsky & Kurtz, LLP. Offices offer reception, library, conference rooms + kitchen & amenities. Please contact Lissa at (818) 382-3434.

WOODLAND HILLS Sublease. Window office (17’x10’) plus secretarial bay, full-service suite, receptionist, voicemail, copier, conference room. Call (818) 999-9397.

SPACE AVAILABLE

Corner office. 14x19. Floor to ceiling windows. Secretarial bay adjacent. Free parking. Executive suite with receptionist, conference rooms, kitchen and amenities. Contact Eric (818)784-8700.

SHERMAN OAKS

COULDN’T ATTEND AN IMPORTANT

SFVBASEMINAR?

SFVBAMCLESeminars

Audio

Who is Versatape?Versatape has been

recording and marketing audio copies of bar association

educational seminars to California attorneys since 1983.

www.versatape.com(800)468-2737

Most SFVBA seminars since 2013

available on audio CD or MP3.

Stay current and earn MCLE credit.

Highest AVVO Rating 10.0 out of 10.0

40 Years in practiceArbitrator for FINRA

Superlawyer – Securities Litigation

The Attorney Referral Service of the SFVBA is a valuable service, one that operates for the direct purpose of referring potential clients to qualified attorneys. It also pays dividends to the attorneys involved. Many of the cases referred by the ARS earn significant fees for panel attorneys.

Referring the Best Attorneys Since 1948




TrialWar

Rooms

CourtReporting

Jury TrialFocus Groups

VideoConferencing

8 GreatLocations

MediationRooms

800-43-DEPOS

Visit all 8 of our locations

www.personalcourtreporters.com

COURT REPORTERS, INC.

Grand OpeningSanta Ana

Van Nuys Downtown LA Ontario

West LA San BernardinoSanta Barbara

Ventura

Santa Ana

New!!!

The road tosuccess starts

with us.

Documents

Giving Back: One Firm’s Legacy of Serving the Community · giving back over the years. The example wasn’t lost as Steve has passed that precious gift down to his own children,